I'm not totally sure that I should be writing this review because I purchased the book recently though I actually read it some 45 years ago as "The year of Salamis". And I purchased this revised and updated book (published in 1996) for my son who is about to engage in a couple of years of ancient history study. Obviously the book made a big impression on me because I am basically writing this review on the basis of my recollections of the original...some 45 years ago. I confess that I have not re-read in entirety (in truth, very little) of the new version. However, I HAVE read the author's introduction where he describes some of the changes he has made and some of the academic criticism directed at the original version. (For example, he was accused of fictionalising his characters a bit too much and having the novelist's desire to avoid a gap in the story).
However, from my perspective that is one of the things that I really liked about the work. It runs like a story yet has fascinating facts injected ...such as the military expert who looked over the terrain that Xerxes had to cover and looking at the water resources in particular, estimated that the Persian army, at most, numbered about 210,000 (not the 1.7M infantry plus about another 400,000 estimated by Herodotus).
I was just re-reading the section on the battle of Marathon and I must say, that Peter Green tells a good story. He had me captivated again.
Although the book is focused on the events in the straits of Salamis and the naval victory of Greeks over Persians, he sets the stage well. From the victory of Marathon to the invasion by the massive Persian army and fleet and the follow up land campaigns, Green tells a fascinating tale. He writes well, and (as I said above) he is a great story teller. (Though apparently this is not really appreciated by the academic historian critics).
My version of the book is a bit tattered and marked (I bought it second hand) and I am contemplating buying a new version.
One of the things that I remembered reading some 45 years ago was the importance of Themistocles to the victory at Salamis......his insistence on building an expensive fleet of triremes. Also the luck of finding a wealth of silver at the mines in Laurium. Though to get his way with the assembly and get access to the silver and authority to build the fleet, he did not refer to a war with Persia ...but with a more direct threat from Aegina...which was cutting off trade from Piraeus.
And, of course, the famous battle at Thermopylae which Green manages to turn into something like a thrilling narrative. Certainly, it engaged me. Although the Spartan's lost the battle there, he quotes William Golding on the eventual outcome: "If you were a Persian....neither you nor Leonidas nor anyone else could foresee that here thirty year's time was won for shining Athens and all Greece and for all humanity.....A little of Leonidas lies in the fact that I can go where I like and write what I like. He contributed to set us free".
I really like this book. And I think Green has done an excellent job of making history more than just interesting. It's made it quite fascinating. Five stars from me. ( )

This is a detailed authoritative though very readable history of the first and second invasion of Greece during the Greco-Persian Wars (499-479 BC). It was first published in 1970 but still worth reading 40+ years on, Peter Green has a great sense of historical detail and accuracy balanced by readability and narrative flow. Conflicts covered include:

First invasion of Greece (492-490)
**Battle of Marathon (490)
Second invasion of Greece (480-479)
**Battles of Thermopylae and Artemisium (480)
**Battle of Salamis (480)
**Battles of Plataea and Mycale (479)

There are other conflicts from the Persian Wars not covered in the book, but these two invasions are the most well known and central. Herodotus is the main source and quoted a lot (along with Thucydides), but balanced with modern theories, investigations and evidence (as of 1970). Because all the surviving sources are Greek the story is usually told from a Greek perspective, so it naturally feels one sided in perspective. Green is an unabashed cheerleader of the Greeks who established Democratic freedom over authoritative tyranny.

Probably the only way to improve on Green's book would be to write one from the Persian perspective, which lacking source is hard to do, although Tom Holland in Persian Fire was able to piece together something (I have not read it). Wikipedia also has good series of articles that are worth checking out. ( )

Perhaps the most balanced and comprehensive overview of the Persian wars, from the political background and machinations on both sides leading up to the battle of Marathon to the final defeat of the Persian army in Greece at Plataea and the breaking of Persian naval power in the Aegean shortly afterwards off Samos. It's not often that I feel like re-reading a history when I've just finished it, but this one is so far-reaching and Green writes with such precision and verve that I feel as though I should just start at the beginning and read it all over again, perhaps in tandem with some of the primary sources -- Herodotus, Plutarch, Diodorus Siculus. ( )

Highly recommended; exciting read with sound scholarship

This book was a very pleasant surprise. I expected a dry, academic work. But this book turns out to be a fascinatingly detailed military account of the Persian Wars that while written in an almost journalistically readable narrative style still has virtually every paragraph footnoted with solid sources.

Two revelations that came upon me in the book:

(1) While Thermopylae was highy inspirational for the Greeks - and the Spartan sacrifice a basis for rallying Greek morale - it was at the time strategically an unmitigated disaster for the Greek cause. The Greeks expected the Spartans and other Greek allied units to hold back the Persian horde for much, much longer than they actually did. The betrayal of the secret mountain pass cut short what had been intended to be a much longer holding action. The Greeks mobilizing to the south had to greatly speed up their preparations. Yet the defeat was truly inspirational. Green likens Thermopylae to the World War II "Miracle of Dunkirk" which, while inspirational, was overall a terribly disastrous setback for British arms.

(2) Cleisthenes created Athenian democracy not based on some ideological devotion to the cause of popular rule. Instead he was a grasping, power-hungry politican on the outs who contrived to regain power by radically expanding the franchise to a greatly expanded electorate who he basically bribed to elect him. He had no theory of democracy, but once the genie was out of the bottle he couldn't put it back in. ( )

I read this as a follow-up to The Landmark Herodotus. The author does quote heavily from Herodotus. He also uses other semi-contemporary sources and some other significant books on the topic. I thought this was an excellent book. At least 25% of the book was analysis. Comparison of the sources and the theories of other authors to get the best idea of what happened. Why did Xerxes or Themistocles or the Spartans do or not do something. Excellent portraits of the major characters. Some real insight into what life was like, how wars were fought.
The story is very familiar but the author brought fresh life to the events. The struggle is covered from start to finish in great detail. My only problem was the author's use of short phrases in several languages other than English that I didn't understand. Maybe that is my problem.
I enjoyed the book and it made me want to read more about this era and also Persian history. While not emphasized there is always the thought of what would life be like if the Greeks had lost. I think it would be a very different world and that is to me what makes the story so significant. Looking at the forces involved and the outcome is what makes it so interesting. ( )